I am not going to go back and read through all 8(?) pages of this - hell, I barely read the last 2 and was ready to start stabbing pens in my eyes. That said, here is my .02 I for one would rather see Yura play. I have always felt that the team did better when he was in there than when he is out. Dallas game is a perfect example. The FO needs to quit acting like a bunch of sorority sisters going after the same guy and either agree to sell him or put him on the pitch. If we are going to shift directions and give some of the guys playing time that will be with the team next year then what is the point in keeping him around. Here's a thought....why can't we try and find someone who can finish? It's obvious that it isn't gonna be Findley either, so let's bench him too.
Re: 2009 RSL In-Season News Thread, Part IV Do any of us want RSL to be thought of as a walkover in contract negotiations in coming years? Of course not. This is precisely why RSL must hold Yura to his contract or get the value they ask for him. If that agent thinks that RSL can be bullied, then there will be no end to the troubles RSL will have in negotiations. If the agent (and other agents who are watching, because there are no real secrets in that business) learns that RSL means what it says and says what it means, a contract is a contract, etc., they will know next time to bargain in good faith. RSL is bargaining in good faith to say: This is Yura's contract, and this is the price to buy it out. Come with a check for that amount if you want to have Yura play for Randers. Meanwhile, Yura plays as we direct, as the professional footballer that he is.
Re: 2009 RSL In-Season News Thread, Part IV Spot on! The person making the assertion of other's motivations or behaviors is definitively under the obligation to provide evidence to support those assertions. Persons skeptical of those assertions have every right to ask for such evidence and, lacking any decent evidence as support, can reject the assertions as so much hot air. We see this behavior all the time amongst charlatans claiming to read people's auras or selling magnets to heal aches, and other balderdash. They make claims and skeptics ask for evidence. Evidence is usually not provided, or that which is provided is terribly poor in quality, so the skeptics (quite rightly) call BS on the claims. We often see such charlatans say that the skeptic must 'prove' that their assertions are wrong. Of course, this is logically irrational. Proving a negative is not possible. Interested readers can analyze what we know about this situation and what is being claimed by various poster and determine who is making supportable claims about RSL's motivations and unrevealed behavior, about Rander's motivations and unrevealed behavior, about Yura's motivations and unrevealed behavior, and about Yura's agent's motivations and unrevealed behavior.
Re: 2009 RSL In-Season News Thread, Part IV so Yura is "hurt" and "sick" for the Chivas game huh... wow RSL, just plain and simply wow
Re: 2009 RSL In-Season News Thread, Part IV Having slept on this & cooled down, I'm willing to substitute my question of "bad faith" (which seems to be an *electrified 3rd rail* for some here) for a claim of "bad judgment". Fair enough? Now... Given what we know, what are some specific reasons why rejecting Randers' cash (~$250K pro-rated) for Yura's final 8 (non-playing) matches is "sound judgment"? How is that in RSL's best financial & competetive interests going forward? It's an honest quesiton. There may well be facts out there that I don't know. I sincerely hope there are. Because I love RSL. Anyone? (...and please don't reply "Garth just didn't feel the price was right".)
Could this decision have come from someone higher than Garth in the organization? Just a question. Frankly, in the debate on this thread, I believe that both sides have made vaery valid and supported arguments. I think it just comes down to the value system of whoever made the decision. And honestly, either way, I respect people who stick to their values. I liken the Yura situation to the Denver Broncos current situation with their unhappy star player. The Broncos let their QB just walk away last season. It sent a signal to others that "If I make a lot of noise, they'll let me walk away too". Thus they have what they have. Yes, money (revenue in RSL's case) is very important. But in the big picture sometimes you just have to draw a line in the sand. Regardless of all of that, this would have been much more interesting if Yura had not incurred the injury a couple of weeks ago. The injury situation created a veil of sorts that fairly effectively blocks the public's (i.e, fans) view of the drama.
My question is how much of the pro rated 250K does RSl get. Doesn't MLS get some or most of the money? How does it work? And the Yura is injured/sick statement by JK is lame, just come clean and tell the truth. When Yura's agent says he can play don't use the injury excuse, it makes JK look even worse as a coach. Hell just say "no comment".
Re: 2009 RSL In-Season News Thread, Part IV Yes. As I said earlier RSL's actions are probably not in their best interest in the short term. Just looking at the numbers I would guess that RSL's share of a $250,000 transfer fee would more than pay for his salary for the entire season. I don't even pretend to understand the economics of transfer fees. All I know is that they can dwarf the salary of the player. Based on the reported offers of between 250K and 750K, I can only conclude that an expiring contract has some serious value. I think that the RSL is sending a message to teams, agents, and players that this is how RSL plays the game: If a player signs a pre-contract we will either be fairly compensated to let him transfer or he will play for us at 100% for the rest of his contract. If he does not give 100% he will not play. If he causes morale problem with the team he will not train. The last two, especially the last, are very important. A player owes it to RSL to honor his contract and give full effort. He owes it to his new team to stay fit. That will be very difficult if RSL keeps him out of practice to maintain team morale. I won't say where Yura is. He did give 100% before he got injured. Is his shoulder keeping him out of training? I don't know. Rotator cuff injuries act a lot like hamstrings and we all know how unpredictable they are. One day they seem fine and then you reinjure it getting a box of corn flakes off the top shelf in the cupboard. Having sent the message--suppose that next year a team from Europe wants to sign one of our player to a pre-contract. The agent will have to tell the team that RSL will not accept a lowball offer to release the player. The player knows what is expected of him. Maybe they will negotiate or maybe they will decide to wait until October to do anything. That would not be a bad result of the currect situation. The other factor that has not been addresses is that MLS owns the contract. Could it be that they nixed Randers' offer?
Re: 2009 RSL In-Season News Thread, Part IV A reason I can see that might be enough justification is an unwillingness to set a bad precedent. I think if you remove the names of the parties involved and just look at the facts available it seems to me that one side tried to publically leverage the other into taking what they felt was an unattractive price to void an existing contract. They then showed an unwillingness to negotiate when presented with a counter offer. The problem is Randers isn't negotiating - they're giving RSL a very public Hobson's choice.
Rotator cuff injuries are as predictable as hamstrings. You cannot trust anyone. I can think of at least three players who were "ready to play," only to reinjure themselves (Rusty, Atiba, Ian). We (the fans) gave RSL all kinds of grief for letting them play. Atiba absolutely insisted he was 100% and the consensus was that the team should have used better jugement than Atiba. Fans have also said that RSL must have an incompetent medical staff because they let players play too soon. The team says his injury is keeping him out--by what reasoning should we accept an agent's evaluation over the team's? (Especially when in the past we said they have been to quick to let the player return.)
First of all, the $250K is a suspect number to begin with. I know where the number came from, but I was told a lower number, not sure if either are correct. (I'm doubtful we'll ever know this) Second, the split of transfer fees is complicated. Technically the team gets 2/3rds of this (that is held by the league), but there are huge restrictions on how this can be spent. A certain amount can be spent on player acquisitions. Some of the money may also be spent on "an investment in the club" - youth programs, etc. If I recall, last season Toronto had talked about using some of the Maurice Edu transfer for grass at BMO. I think the most compelling reason to keep Yura - is they need him. If they are losing out on $80K-$100K, but Yura repeats his performance from down the stretch last year - I think it's worth it to the organization to keep him. Unfortunately this injury has hampered that ability. I thought he played really well for a game or two after his announced move, but he had an ankle injury against Dallas and then the rotator cuff. I'm sure the injuries have added to the frustration of the entire situation.
Excellent point. If he played and re-injured himself in New England, he could be done for the year, and we would all be blaming RSL. Unless you are on the coaching staff, we probably will never really know for sure.
Hmm...I had thought for a while that up to $500,000 of the 2/3 portion of the transfer fee could be used for an allocation, so if RSL really could sell Yura for $250k, they'd be looking at a about $165k in allocation money (i.e. all of the transfer fee would be available for player salaries as allocation $$ since it totaled less than $500k). But after doing some quick research, I couldn't verify this, and actually saw some weird numbers I haven't ever seen before, like: "past teams tend to get about 20% of the transfer fee." If that's the case, RSL would have closer to $50k. The rest of the money could only be used in "team operations". Anyone know anything more?
I think the $500K is the max. For instance, that was the amount that could be used on player acquisitions for Altidore which was a huge transfer fee. But I think that for lower transfer fees there is some formula - maybe it's the 20% - for how much can be used on player acquisitions. I have never seen anything definitive on this. With the Altidore transfer I do remember that there was a Q&A out there with Gadzikis? or whoever it was that was deputy commish.
That's the discussion I got the 500k number from. This sounds just about right -- why would MLS have a simple and transparent process for something when it can be byzantine and super secret?
Re: 2009 RSL In-Season News Thread, Part IV My Yura math. If you sell 20,000 tickets for a playoff game at an average of $25 a piece (guessing here), that's $500,000. I believe the FO believes that Yura can help RSL get there, and I agree, because he did it last year, and he brought us back from the brink against FC Dallas.
Re: 2009 RSL In-Season News Thread, Part IV Is RSL squashing all discussion of Yura on KALL 700? I didn't hear a single caller tonight ask Spencer or Trey about it. I mean Yura, love him, hate him, has been a major player for us the last 12 months. Now its like he is dead.
Re: 2009 RSL In-Season News Thread, Part IV after last nights game, as I was walking back to the car, I said to my brother "Yura who?"
"Yura who?" reflects the attitude of the typical RSL fan. We know he going to be gone, so we are separating ourselves from him. On the Kall 700 pre-game show yesterday they talke about Yura. They seemed to be saying he has contracted the flu.